Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late report in relation to the item shown on the agenda. Please note that under the Council’s Constitution – Part 4 Section B paragraph 17 – this being a special meeting of the Cabinet no other business shall be considered.

There were no items of urgent business.

A Member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A Member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

No declarations of interest were made.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.

The Leader advised that a deputation request and public question had been received in relation to Item 10: ‘High Road West Regeneration Project – Master Plan Option Consultation Feedback and Next Steps’. Both the deputation and question would be led by Mr Alex Tryfonos.

Mr Tryfonos also formally presented Cabinet with a petition in objection to the way consultation with businesses and residents had been conducted.

There was agreement that Item 10 should be brought forward and considered after Item 5 of the agenda.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

There are no items of exempt business being considered within this agenda.

This is the formal 5 clear day notice under the Regulations to confirm that this Cabinet meeting will be partly held in private for the reasons set out in this Agenda.

There were no representation received.

(Report of the Director of Place and Sustainability. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration). The report sets out the feedback received from the High Road West options consultation earlier this year and the next steps for the High Road West Regeneration Project.

(As set out above Item 10 was moved forward within the agenda)

Prior to consideration of the report Cabinet received a deputation led by Mr Tryfonos.

Deputation

Mr Tryfonos began by noting that many of the businesses that would be affected by the regeneration of the High Road were family owned and had been in operation for many years. He contended that the views of small business owners had not been gathered as part of the consultation process to date and argued that if they had been taken into account the results of the consultation process outlined in the report would be very different.

Mr Tryfonos expressed concern that small businesses were being pressurised to move out of the area and suggested that there was a feeling that plans for the redevelopment of the area had already been agreed.

In conclusion Mr Tryfonos noted that regeneration of the area should primarily focus on improving the lives of existing residents and businesses rather than changing the character of an area entirely. He noted that a key part of the Council’s ‘I love Tottenham’ campaign had been about supporting local traders and asked that Cabinet continue to support that sentiment by taking on board the objections raised by small business owners in relation to the consultation process to date.

Cabinet Members then put questions to Mr Tryfonos with respect to the comments made as part of his deputation.

In response to a question as to how the Council had engaged with local businesses Mr Tryfonos advised that he had had numerous meetings with Council officers regarding his concerns over the last year. However, he noted that these had been initiated by him rather than the Council and he suggested that the Council should have been more proactive in seeking the views of local businesses. He also noted that prior to the Council formally beginning to look at the regeneration of the area there had been no informal consultation with residents and he contended that this would be have been useful.

When asked whether he thought that no change was an option for the area Mr Tryfonos noted that he was not against the regeneration of the area in principle; however, he was concerned that longstanding small businesses would be forced out of the area and he reiterated earlier comments regarding the need to focus on improving the lives of existing residents rather than changing the character of the area entirely.

In response to a question as what form he would like to see changes to the area take Mr Tryfonos advised that he felt that Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) and demolition should be not be used and that, instead, existing businesses and buildings should be incorporated into regeneration plans. He also noted that creating better homes and new jobs should be the primary focus of regeneration work and that this should be achieved without losing existing businesses.

When asked whether he would take up the opportunity to relocate his business if the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 556.

(Report of the Director of Place and Sustainability. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration). The report seeks approval of the emerging Strategic Regeneration Framework and associated Area Wide and Neighbourhood Framework Plans for consultation through the consultation and engagement arrangements detailed in this report.

REPORT TO FOLLOW

Prior to the consideration of this item a presentation was given by Mr Joe Berridge of Urban Strategies. A copy of the presentation was appended to the report.

Cabinet considered a report, introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration, which sought approval of the emerging Strategic Framework and associated Area Wide and Neighbourhood Framework Plans for consultation through the consultation and engagement arrangements detailed in the report.

Councillor Strickland noted that the Tottenham Regeneration Programme had initially been driven by the need to help businesses and residents return to normal following the riots. Moving forward a more ambitious, broader plan was required to deliver the long term ambitions of the Council and community for Tottenham and the Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF) was intended to provide the overarching plan and long term vision for Tottenham.

In response to concerns raised regarding the impact that regeneration work might have upon people living in poor quality, private rented accommodation, Councillor Strickland noted that ensuring that all residents had good quality homes was a key priority for the Council and this would be reflected in the SRF.

With regard to concern expressed in relation to the level of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in Tottenham and what would be done to address the issues attached to this as part of the regeneration work, it was noted that the Cabinet Member for Planning and Enforcement was looking at means of improving the way the Council dealt with these and that this work was closely linked to the SRF.

Councillor Strickland advised Members that details regarding the Programme Management Office Delivery Board had been set out at a recent Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting.

In response to a request that an archive was created where all of the background documents that fed into the SRF and other key regeneration documents Councillor Strickland agreed that this was a good idea and asked that officers look at establishing this.

When asked how residents who might not normally get involved in consultation events would be engaged with, Councillor Strickland advised that four Community Liaison Groups were being established across Tottenham with a view to engaging stakeholders that had not been reached through previous consultation events. The importance of engaging with schools and young people was noted and it was recognised good schools were essential to keeping and attracting families to Tottenham.

The Cabinet Member for Finance, Employment and Carbon Reduction, Councillor Goldberg, underlined the importance of employment and creating new jobs in Tottenham and noted that two hundred local people had recently been employed by the new Sainsbury’s on the High Road. Strategies such as the one used in this case, to ensure local people benefited from new jobs in the area, would be pivotal to regeneration work and the SRF would support this. He noted that replacing jobs lost in the 1960’s and 1970’s was an essential part of the regeneration of the area.

RESOLVED:

1. That the emerging Strategic Regeneration Framework and associated Area-Wide and Neighbourhood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 557.

(Report of the Director of Place and Sustainability. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration). The report seeks approval of the new Housing Investment and Estate Renewal Strategy.

Cabinet considered a report, introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration, which sought approval of the new Housing Investment and Estate Renewal Strategy. It was noted that the report made recommendations with regard to the approach that the Council should take to its housing stock over the medium to long term including the building of new homes as well as improving existing homes.

Prior to consideration of the report it was noted that Larkspur Close had been removed from the list of medium size sites pending further investigation and discussion.

In response to a question Councillor Strickland confirmed that it was intented to ensure that internal skills were developed to replace the temporary consultancy support that was helping to commence the delivery of the new build and estate renewal programme.

It was noted that residents often expressed concern that properties were brought by people living abroad or that social housing was let out at a profit by tenants. Councillor Strickland noted that the Council needed to give the clear message that as part of the strategy it was building homes not just houses for local families to live in. As part of this strategies for achieving longer term tenancies in good quality private rented accommodation would be important. He also noted that under many affordable housing schemes such as shared ownership and rent to buy these were based on the condition that properties were not rented out.

In response to a question regarding Noel Park and when improvements would be made to homes there Councillor Strickland noted there were specific issues attached to Noel Park due to its status as a Conservation Area that needed to be addressed before plans could be brought forward. There was agreement that officers would respond to Councillor Wilson’s queries with respect to consultation with leaseholders at Noel Park outside the meeting.

RESOLVED:

1. That the Housing Investment and Estate Renewal Strategy attached at Appendix A be adopted and that the strategic objectives of the strategy set out at 5.10 of the report be agreed; 

2. That the proposed approach to housing estate renewal and new build development set out in Section 8 of the report be noted and agreed;

3. That it be agreed that for those estates described in section 8.5 and listed at Appendix B of the report, that consultation be started with the affected residents, including their involvement in the selection of master planners and/or architects, to identify the best solutions for renewal/regeneration;

4. That it be agreed to progress an initial programme of new build Council housing, on under-utilised Council owned land (listed at Appendix C), funded through the capital programme;

5. That authority be delegated to the the Director of Corporate Resources and the Director of Place and Sustainability in conjunction with  the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing, , to progress each of the sites included in the initial programme (Appendix C of the report) to planning application and construction tender subject to satisfactory capacity and financial analysis;

6. That the consultation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 558.

(Report of the Director of Place and Sustainability. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Planning and Enforcement). The report sets out the draft Site Allocations Development Plan Document and seeks approval for public consultation.

Cabinet considered a report, introduced by the Cabinet Member for Planning and Enforcement, which sought approval to go out to public consultation on the Site Allocations Plan Document from January to February 2014.

In introducing the report Councillor Ejiofor noted that the document set out the strategic vision and objectives that the Council would seek to achieve through its planning decisions in the forthcoming years. The sites allocations approach would help build consensus in the community and with stakeholders and would also provide a fair and objective legal basis for balancing competing priorities and promoting positive actions.

In conclusion Councillor Ejiofor reminded Members that the document would also be subject to a Public Examination led by a Planning Inspector.

In response to questions in relation to sites identified at Pinkham Way; the former Hornsey Depot site and; Finsbury Park, Cabinet was advised that there were no plans for waste facility on the Pinkham Way site. With regard to the Finsbury Park site and concerns expressed with regard to the boundary with the park itself Cabinet was advised that this would be reviewed to ensure that there was no encroachment on the boundary to the park.

It was noted that the Council wanted to see the best possible scheme achieved at the Hornsey Depot site and that problems experienced with the New River Village scheme would be raised with the developer. 

RESOLVED:

1. That the draft Site Allocations Development Plan be approved for public consultation (Regulation 18 consultation on the ‘subject matter’) as set out in Appendix A of the report; and

2. That the Cabinet  Member – Housing and Regeneration, in consultation with the Director of Place and Sustainability be authorised to amend Appendix A documents to improve presentation and content of the proposed ‘subject matter’ to aid public engagement.

Alternative options considered

The Site Allocations DPD is a key component of the Local Plan portfolio of Local Development Documents. It helps provide detail for potential development sites and deliver the key objectives of the Council’s adopted Local Plan Strategic Policies.

The alternative is to not prepare a Site Allocations DPD, and to rely instead on the London Plan and Local Plan Strategic Policies to provide the basis for making planning decisions on the development of sites brought forward by the market. In some cases, site development briefs or other non statutory guidance could be prepared for sites of particular interest. There would be no formal statutory basis for engaging stakeholders, and opportunities to combine infrastructure and development synergies will not be exploited.

Without the Site Allocations DPD, the Council’s ability to bring forward a co-ordinated planned development of significant sites in the borough to deliver the Council’s strategic policies and priorities for development including housing supply, employment, social, physical and environmental infrastructure will be weakened. Statutory planning through DPDs is necessary for a sound framework for planning applications decisions and land assembly.

The statutory planning process is founded on evidence, consensus building through consultation, plan appraisal and independent examination. These processes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 559.

(Report of the Director of Place and Sustainability. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Planning and Enforcement). The report introduces the proposed Area Action Plans (AAP) for Tottenham intended for public consultation.

Cabinet considered a report, introduced by the Cabinet Member for Planning and Enforcement, which introduced the proposed Area Action Plans (AAP) for Tottenham intended for public consultation.

In introducing the report Councillor Ejiofor advised that the most effective way of facilitating, combining and directing all the elements that would help to create a thriving and attractive place to live, was to ensure that a joined up approach was taken to economic and employment growth and investment in new housing developments, transport improvements and improved social infrastructure provision. The best mechanism for delivering this was considered to be via a statutory planning document in the form of an Area Plan. 

RESOLVED:

        i.            That the proposed statutory area planning approach for Tottenham be approved;

      ii.            That the draft Tottenham Area Action Plans, attached at Appendix A of the report, be approved for public consultation (Regulation 18 Consultation); and

    iii.            That the Cabinet for Regeneration and Housing be authorised, in consultation with the Director of Place and Sustainability,  to amend Appendix A documents to improve presentation and content of the proposed ‘subject matter’ to aid public engagement prior to consultation.

Alternative options considered

The Tottenham Area Action Plans are key components of Haringey’s Local Plan portfolio. They will help deliver the key objectives of the Council’s adopted Local Plan Strategic Policies for sustainable growth in the area.

The statutory planning process is founded on evidence, consensus building through consultation, plan appraisal and independent examination. These processes are prescribed under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

The non-statutory planning route which would entail master planning would have to rely on Council land ownership and voluntary negotiations of planning projects with private interests.

As a result the non-statutory planning route was not considered robust enough to deliver the components associated with large scale regeneration aspirations such as complex land assembly projects. For this reason it was concluded that an Area Action Plan is the appropriate mechanism for assisting delivery of planning projects, and reducing risks of legal challenge. Any master planning work such as that already carried out in the High Road West area would be incorporated into the AAP as evidence commissioned by the Council from independent planning consultants.

Reasons for decision

The option discussion articulated under paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 of the report conclude that the most effective way of ensuring the regeneration of Tottenham in accordance with adopted Council policy is through Area Action Plan development.

To consider any items admitted at Item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business.